1985
DOI: 10.17660/actahortic.1985.174.22
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Strategy for Modelling Plant Growth

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

1989
1989
1997
1997

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For modelling W, and RGR, the Feldmann-function was used as described by Bazlen (1985), because it has a great flexibility using only three parameters (Liebig and Lederle, 1985). The function was extended by the shoot weight at transplantation into nutrient solution (start weight, WO) and was related to the sum of daily mean temperatures (T,) instead of time, because of the better relationship to the measured plant growth of the different temperature treatments.…”
Section: Calculation Of Shoot Fresh Weight and Relative Growthmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For modelling W, and RGR, the Feldmann-function was used as described by Bazlen (1985), because it has a great flexibility using only three parameters (Liebig and Lederle, 1985). The function was extended by the shoot weight at transplantation into nutrient solution (start weight, WO) and was related to the sum of daily mean temperatures (T,) instead of time, because of the better relationship to the measured plant growth of the different temperature treatments.…”
Section: Calculation Of Shoot Fresh Weight and Relative Growthmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The model began to fail when PPF was no longer a limiting factor and high temperatures were encountered (crops 15-18). Again, historical light values differed from the measured values, underscoring the difficulty associated with long-term environmental forecast (8).…”
Section: O -O Predicted • -• Expectedmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…The data obtained in this study also indicate that the rate of fruit development did not remain constant throughout the year, as initially assumed in the model. While fruit development occurred over a 45-day period on average, as assumed in the model, the actual values ranged from *40 days in Spring 1987 (crops 14-21) to 50 days, on average, in Fall 1986 (crops [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]. Total PPF during fruit development and the observed seasonal variation in the rate of fruit development were indeed poorly correlated (r2 = 0.58), as previously determined (11).…”
Section: O -O Predicted • -• Expectedmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation